Intel CEO Lip-Bu Tan has responded after Donald Trump accused him of being "highly conflicted" and said he should resign, according to The Financial Times. "There has been a lot of misinformation circulating about my past roles," Tan said in a letter to Intel staff. "I wanted to be absolutely clear... I have always operated within the highest legal and ethical standards." Tan said that Intel was engaging with the White House "to address the matters that have been raised and ensure they have the facts." 

Trump's Truth Social post demanding Tan's resignation reportedly came about due to letter to Tan from Tom Cotton, the Republican head of the Senate Intelligence Committee. In it, Cotton "expressed concern about the security and integrity of Intel's operations" along with Tan's previous work in China. Tan has invested in Chinese tech companies through his own venture capital firm, including SMIC (Semiconductor Manufacturing International Corp.), China's biggest chip maker. 

In addition, a company that Tan ran before being appointed Intel chief admitted last week to violating US export controls by "unlawfully exporting semiconductor design tools to a restricted PRC [Chinese] military university," according to the US Department of Justice. The company agreed to plead guilty and pay criminal penalties totalling over $140 million dollars. 

Tan took over a very leaky ship with Intel, which has bled red ink over the failure of its foundry business to keep up with rivals like TSMC and win customers. Since taking the job, he launched a cost-cutting program and said that Intel may need to abandon its next-gen fab tech — which hasn't shown great results to date — if it can't find a large customer. In the same letter, Tan said Intel's board is "fully supportive" of that work. 

Trump has meddled with corporations ranging from Apple to Bank of America, making him what one pundit called "the most interventionist White House in my lifetime," particularly for a Republican. "So many Wall Street folks worried that past Democratic administrations would interfere in their business," said MSNBC journalist and lawyer Ari Melber. "But this first year of Trump's second term has done so much more than any modern administration."

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/big-tech/intel-ceo-lip-bu-tan-responds-to-trump-comments-that-he-should-resign-123008812.html?src=rss

©

© Reuters / Reuters

Key sections of the US Constitution were temporarily removed from Congress' website. Provisions including habeas corpus (due process) and the prohibition of nobility titles (like, say, King) vanished from the digital version of the document. They've since been restored. 404 Media first reported on the edits after users on Lemmy forums spotted them.

There are many ways to read a copy of the US Constitution. But the Library of Congress' online version is one of the easiest to find. Alongside its counterpart hosted by the National Archives, it's an official digital communication from the government. Those two websites also sit atop Google's search results for "US Constitution."

So, when key sections vanish from the website, it's worth noting. And when they coincide with those that the Trump administration has said it wants to remove, it's a bit more eyebrow-raising.

Portions of Section 8 of Article I, along with all of Sections 9 and 10 of Article I, were missing. "The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended" was part of that. Also gone was "No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States." Ditto for the provision banning foreign emoluments for US officials.

The Lemmy thread that first caught the changes includes the complete list of edits. The National Archives version wasn't edited.

404 Media notes that, before these edits, the website hadn't changed significantly since first being archived by the Internet Archive’s Wayback Machine. (That archive goes back to 2019.) The US Constitution hasn't changed since 1992.

Bluesky

The Library of Congress said it was a mistake. "It has been brought to our attention that some sections of Article 1 are missing from the Constitution Annotated (constitution.congress.gov) website," the official account posted on Bluesky. "We've learned that this is due to a coding error. We have been working to correct this and expect it to be resolved soon." It was changed back sometime around 2PM ET on Wednesday.

The Trump administration doesn't have official control over the Library of Congress, which runs the website. But in May, the president fired Librarian of Congress Carla Hayden. (White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt claimed she "did not fit the needs of the American people.") Trump then named Todd Blanche, one of his former defense lawyers, as acting Librarian of Congress. The Senate must confirm a permanent replacement.

This isn't the first time official government websites have removed text that the Trump administration finds inconvenient. In March, The NY Times listed hundreds of words the administration removed from public-facing websites and other materials. They include terms like "activism," "disability," "equality," "female," "prejudice," "pollution," "racism," "sex," "transgender" and "women." ("Men" wasn't on the list of banned words.)

Of course, deleting text from the website doesn't change the legally binding document. ("You realize that they still exist even if you don't post them, right?" Jehosaphat Q. Blatte snarked on Bluesky.) But given the current state of affairs, you may want to look elsewhere to bone up on your rights.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/computing/sections-on-habeas-corpus-and-nobility-titles-were-temporarily-removed-from-congress-us-constitution-website-182956441.html?src=rss

©

© Larry Alger / Unsplash

OpenAI has announced that it will be partnering with the US General Services Administration (GSA) to offer ChatGPT Enterprise practically free of charge to the entire executive-branch federal workforce for one year. The dozens of agencies under this umbrella encompass over two million civilian workers. Each agency will be able to access ChatGPT Enterprise for $1 for the year-long period. The year-long trial will also include an additional 60 days of ChatGPT's most advanced models like Deep Research and Advanced Voice Mode with no use limits. This comes one day after the GSA approved OpenAI, Google and Anthropic for the federal AI vendor list.

In the blog post announcing the partnership, OpenAI said: "This effort delivers on a core pillar of the Trump Administration’s AI Action Plan by making powerful AI tools available across the federal government so that workers can spend less time on red tape and paperwork, and more time doing what they came to public service to do: serve the American people."

Part of the administration's plan calls for any AI used in the federal government to be free of ideological bias, yet simultaneously President Trump’s “Preventing Woke AI” executive order directs that AI must not favor "ideological dogmas such as DEI." How OpenAI will deal with the administration's own ideological slant remains to be seen. Current attempts at creating a "maximally truth-seeking AI" have not gone as planned.

According to Bloomberg, OpenAI will not use data from federal workers to train or improve ChatGPT. Addressing whether the $1 price point will buy future loyalty from the current administration, commissioner of the GSA's Federal Acquisition Service Josh Gruenbaum told Bloomberg that no agency would be required to renew after the first year. "These technologies are changing and evolving at breakneck speed. We don’t want to commit ourselves. This is almost like it’s a trial run in some ways." CEO of OpenAI Sam Altman had previously donated $1 million to President Trump’s inauguration fund.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/ai/openai-is-giving-chatgpt-enterprise-to-the-executive-branch-workforce-for-1-165812036.html?src=rss

©

© Justin Sullivan via Getty Images

Israel has allegedly been recording and storing millions of phone calls made by Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank as part of a large surveillance effort dating back to 2022, according to reporting by The Guardian, +972 Magazine and Local Call. The report suggests that the country has been shuttling these recordings to Microsoft Azure cloud servers.

Company CEO Satya Nadella allegedly okayed the effort personally after meeting with a commander from Israel’s military surveillance agency, Unit 8200. He reportedly gave the country a customized and segregated area within the Azure platform to store millions of phone calls made each day without knowledge or consent from Palestinians.

According to sources within Unit 8200, these recordings have assisted in the preparation of deadly airstrikes and helped shape military operations throughout the region. Israel has long been intercepting calls in the occupied territories, as it basically controls the entire Palestinian telecommunications infrastructure.

This new method, however, reportedly captures the conversations of a large pool of regular civilians. The mantra when building out the project was to record "a million calls an hour." Leaked Microsoft files suggest that the lion's share of this data is being stored in Azure facilities in the Netherlands and Ireland.

Microsoft has been facing increased scrutiny regarding its role in Israel's 22-month offensive in Gaza. CEO Nadella was interrupted by an employee at a keynote speech in May, with the worker pleading for the executive to "show how Israeli war crimes are powered by Azure."

Earlier this year, the company commissioned an external review that "found no evidence to date” that Azure or its AI products were "used to target or harm people" in the territory. Today's reporting suggests otherwise. Unit 8200 sources indicate that intelligence drawn from this data was used to identify bombing targets. Microsoft says it has "no information" about the kind of data stored by Israel on its servers.

“At no time during this engagement,” a company representative added, “has Microsoft been aware of the surveillance of civilians or collection of their cellphone conversations using Microsoft’s services, including through the external review it commissioned.” Sources say that usage of the surveillance system increased during the campaign in Gaza. So far, 60,000 people in the territory have been killed, including over 18,000 children.

Microsoft isn't the only company that has been accused of assisting Israel in what many are calling a genocide in Gaza. A report recently found that Google employees have repeatedly worked with the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) and Israel’s Defense Ministry (IDM) to expand the government's access to AI tools.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/big-tech/israel-is-reportedly-storing-millions-of-palestinian-phone-calls-on-microsoft-servers-161127912.html?src=rss

©

© Microsoft

States will lose out on their share of a $42 billion broadband fund if they attempt to dictate rates that internet services providers (ISPs) charge low-income customers, according to a new FAQ from the Trump administration seen by Ars Technica. That means ISPs — which are subsidized by the government in order to provide low-cost plans — will be able to set such rates under the BEAD (Broadband Equity, Access and Deployment) program.

The new language appeared in a BEAD Restructuring Policy Notice (RPN) from the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) in June. "Per the RPN, states may not apply state laws to reimpose LSCO (low-cost service option) requirements removed by the RPN... violation would result in rejection of the final proposal [for states to receive funds]." It added that the the NTIA would only approve plans with low-cost rates set by ISPs. 

The new language would hand ISPs a major win if it holds up. New York state, for one, requires ISPs with more than 20,000 customers to offer $15 broadband plans with minimum 25Mbps download speeds, or $20 plans with 200Mbps speeds, to low-income customers. That law, the Affordable Broadband Act, has held up despite attempts by providers to strike it down in court.

Other states are reconsidering similar laws now. California recently withdrew a bill requiring $15 broadband plans after the NTIA said it could lose out on BEAD funds worth up to $1.86 billion. That decision was excoriated by consumer groups who pointed out that the Supreme Court itself declined to overturn New York's law. 

As he's done many times now, Trump is using federal funds as a cudgel to keep states in line — despite the fact that states' rights are usually supported by US courts. New York assemblymember Amy Paulin, who spearheaded the state's $15 broadband law, said that she believes the NTIA rule only applies to the other 49 states that don't have price mandates. "It's our understanding that any [ISP] BEAD awardee would have to comply with the Affordable Broadband Act regardless of federal subsidy," she told Ars Technica. 

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/general/trump-tells-states-theyll-lose-out-on-broadband-fund-if-they-try-to-dictate-rates-123020395.html?src=rss

©

© ASSOCIATED PRESS

Illinois Governor JB Pritzker has signed a bill into law banning AI therapy in the state. This makes Illinois the first state to regulate the use of AI in mental health services. The law highlights that only licensed professionals are allowed to offer counseling services in the state and forbids AI chatbots or tools from acting as a stand-alone therapist.

HB 1806, titled the Wellness and Oversight for Psychological Resources Act, also specifies that licensed therapists cannot use AI to make “therapeutic decisions” or perform any “therapeutic communication.” It also places constraints on how mental health professionals may use AI in their work, such as specifying that its use for “supplementary support,” such as managing appointments, billing or other administrative work, is allowed.

In a statement to Mashable, Illinois State Representative Bob Morgan said, “We have already heard the horror stories when artificial intelligence pretends to be a licensed therapist. Individuals in crisis unknowingly turned to AI for help and were pushed toward dangerous, even lethal, behaviors.” The law enshrines steep penalties in an effort to curb such outcomes, with companies or individuals facing $10,000 in fines per violation.

“This legislation stands as our commitment to safeguarding the well-being of our residents by ensuring that mental health services are delivered by trained experts who prioritize patient care above all else,” said Mario Treto Jr., secretary of the Illinois Department of Financial and Professional Regulation.

The bill passed the Illinois House and Senate unanimously in a sign of overwhelming bipartisan support. The legislation is particularly notable as the Trump administration’s recently-revealed AI plan outlines a 10-year moratorium on any state-level AI regulation. It also comes as OpenAI has said it is improving the ability for its models to detect mental or emotional distress and will ask users to take a break during unusually long chats.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/ai/illinois-is-the-first-state-to-ban-ai-therapists-145755797.html?src=rss

©

© REUTERS / Reuters

President Donald Trump's latest economic move is to halt the de minimis exemption, a provision that made international shipments of low-value items cheaper. When the exemption ends on August 29, shipments valued at or under $800 will be subject to duty fees when sent by any carrier other than the international postal network, no matter what country they are coming from.

According to the White House's announcement of this change, shipments will either be assessed with an ad valorem duty equal to the tariff rate for the country of origin set by the International Emergency Economic Powers Act or with a limited-time specific duty between $80 and $200 per item. The specific duty will only be a available for six months, after which all shipments will be subject to an ad valorem duty. The administration claimed the de minimis exemption was harming US businesses and that the loophole was being used to ship synthetic opioids such as fentanyl into the country.

The administration had already suspended de minimis exemptions for shipments from China and Hong Kong in May. A large number of those low-cost purchases originated in those regions, which are the center for several online shopping sites specializing in inexpensive goods, such as Shein and Temu and Amazon's Haul.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/big-tech/trump-will-end-the-de-minimis-exemption-for-low-cost-global-shipments-202707806.html?src=rss

©

© REUTERS / Reuters

Google says it will sign the European Union’s new AI Code of Practice, which provides a framework for compliance with the EU’s AI Act. The act itself was passed in 2024, but its many provisions will take months to years to come into effect. The non-binding Code of Practice is a voluntary measure intended to help ensure that companies generally meet the obligations laid out by the Act in the meantime.

In a blog post announcing Google’s participation, the tech giant shared some skepticism about the AI Act’s impact on the technology in the EU. The statement reads in part, "While the final version of the Code comes closer to supporting Europe’s innovation and economic goals than where it began — and we appreciate the opportunity we have been provided to submit comments — we remain concerned that the AI Act and Code risk slowing Europe’s development and deployment of AI."

Just recently, Meta said it would not be signing the Code of Practice. The company’s chief global affairs officer, Joel Kaplan, called the Code an "over-reach." In a statement, Kaplan said, "Europe is heading down the wrong path on AI."

The EU’s AI Act is the first of its kind from a major regulator and is comprehensive in its approach. Meanwhile, the United States is in the earliest stages of determining its approach to AI regulation.

Obligations under the EU’s AI Act are being implemented in a staggered fashion, though rules governing general‑purpose AI (GPAI) models will apply on August 2, 2025. Any models brought to market before then must be fully compliant with the rules by August 2, 2027. The current implementation timeline lists assessment and enforcement steps as far out as August 2031.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/big-tech/google-will-sign-eus-ai-code-of-practice-140741058.html?src=rss

©

© Reuters / Reuters

Meta will stop allowing political advertising on its platforms in the European Union as of October 2025, blaming the EU’s new "unworkable" transparency rules for what it called a "difficult decision." In a statement released by the company on Friday, Meta said the EU’s incoming Transparency and Targeting of Political Advertising (TTPA) regulations presented it with "significant operational challenges and legal uncertainties."

As of early October, users on any of Meta’s platforms in the EU will no longer see political, electoral or social issue ads, which Meta says can currently be placed by advertisers who complete an authorization process proving their identity. Ads of this nature are also required to include a "paid for by" disclaimer, and information about how much was spent on them must be publicly available.

Meta argues that the TTPA rules put extensive restrictions on ad targeting and delivery that create an "untenable level of complexity" for advertisers. The EU introduced the new regulations in order to address widespread concerns over foreign interference in elections, as well as the potential manipulation of important information that might influence how someone votes.

As well as labelling political advertising as such and providing information on its source and intention (which Meta says it already does), the soon-to-be-instated EU rules also list a number of conditions about how personal data is processed. The TTPA regulations will also forbid political ads from sponsors outside the EU sooner than three months before an election or referendum.

Meta said that users of its platforms will see less relevant ads as a result of the restrictions, and that it made its decision after "extensive engagement with policymakers" in which it made its concerns about the threat to the "principles of personalized advertising" clear. The company’s decision only applies to the EU, and Meta users, including politicians, living in member states will still be allowed to discuss and share political content provided it isn’t via paid advertising.

Meta isn’t the only company objecting to the incoming EU rule changes, which are also set to come into effect in October. Last year, Google stopped serving paid-for political ads in the EU, including on YouTube, and the company ultimately avoided fines for its allegedly "abusive" online advertising practices in 2019.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/big-tech/meta-will-stop-running-political-ads-in-the-eu-162232948.html?src=rss

©

© Reuters / Reuters

The US Senate has granted the Internet Archive federal depository status, making it officially part of an 1,100-library network that gives the public access to government documents, KQED reported. The designation was made official in a letter from California Senator Alex Padilla to the Government Publishing Office that oversees the network. "The Archive's digital-first approach makes it the perfect fit for a modern federal depository library, expanding access to federal government publications amid an increasingly digital landscape," he wrote. 

Established by Congress in 1813, the Federal Depository Library Program is designed to help the public access government records. Each congressional member can designate up to two libraries, which include government information like budgets, a code of federal regulations, presidential documents, economic reports and census data. 

With its new status, the Internet Archive will be gain improved access to government materials, founder Brewster Kahle said in a statement. "By being part of the program itself, it just gets us closer to the source of where the materials are coming from, so that it’s more reliably delivered to the Internet Archive, to then be made available to the patrons of the Internet Archive or partner libraries." The Archive could also help other libraries move toward digital preservation, given its experience in that area. 

It's some good news for the site which has faced legal battles of late. It was sued by major publishers over loans of digital books during the Coronavirus epidemic and was forced by a federal court in 2023 to remove more than half a million titles. And more recently, major music label filed lawsuits over its Great 78 Project that strove to preserve 78 RPM records. If it loses that case it could owe more than $700 million damages and possibly be forced to shut down. 

The new designation likely won't aid its legal problems, but it does affirm the site's importance to the public. "In October, the Internet Archive will hit a milestone of 1 trillion pages," Kahle wrote. "And that 1 trillion is not just a testament to what libraries are able to do, but actually the sharing that people and governments have to try and create an educated populace."

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/general/internet-archive-is-now-an-official-us-government-document-library-123036065.html?src=rss

©

© SOPA Images via Getty Images

Regulators won't stand in the way of Skydance's Paramount acquisition. The Federal Communications Commission has approved the $8 billion purchase of Paramount Global and its subsidiaries, including the parent company of CBS Network. In a statement, FCC Chairman Brendan Carr said he welcomes "Skydance’s commitment to make significant changes at the once storied CBS broadcast network." Skydance, he said, has made written commitments to ensure that its "news and entertainment programming will embody a diversity of viewpoints across the political and ideological spectrum." He also said that Skydance has "committed that it will not establish" DEI programs.

"Americans no longer trust the legacy national news media to report fully, accurately, and fairly. It is time for a change...These commitments, if implemented, would enable CBS to operate in the public interest and focus on fair, unbiased, and fact-based coverage. Doing so would begin the process of earning back Americans’ trust. Today’s decision also marks another step forward in the FCC’s efforts to eliminate invidious forms of DEI discrimination," part of Carr's statement reads. 

FCC Commissioner Anna M. Gomez, however, issued a statement saying she cannot support the deal "in light of the payout and other troubling concessions Paramount made to settle a baseless lawsuit." In early July, Paramount agreed to pay $16 million to settle the lawsuit Donald Trump filed over a CBS interview with Kamala Harris during the 2020 presidential campaign. His lawyers accused the network of editing her answers to "confuse, deceive and mislead the public." 

Legal experts said at the time that Paramount may have settled to ensure that there are no obstacles for the merger's approval. When news about the acquisition first came out, the company said that it plans to rebuild its streaming technology while reducing costs under its new CEO David Ellison. Paramount, after all, invested billions into its streaming service Paramount+, and it had yet to turn a profit. The company said that it was allocating the $16 million to Trump's future presidential library and not paying him "directly or indirectly."

"In an unprecedented move, this once-independent FCC used its vast power to pressure Paramount to broker a private legal settlement and further erode press freedom," Gomez said in her statement. "Once again, the agency is undermining legitimate efforts to combat discrimination and expand opportunity by overstepping its authority and intervening in employment matters reserved for other government entities with proper jurisdiction on these issues. Even more alarming, it is now imposing never-before-seen controls over newsroom decisions and editorial judgment, in direct violation of the First Amendment and the law."

She added: "The Paramount payout and this reckless approval have emboldened those who believe the government can — and should — abuse its power to extract financial and ideological concessions, demand favored treatment, and secure positive media coverage. It is a dark chapter in a long and growing record of abuse that threatens press freedom in this country. But such violations endure only when institutions choose capitulation over courage. It is time for companies, journalists, and citizens alike to stand up and speak out, because unchecked and unquestioned power has no rightful place in America."

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/entertainment/fcc-approves-skydances-8-billion-paramount-acquisition-032028104.html?src=rss

©

© PATRICK T. FALLON / AFP

Current and former members of the FDA told CNN about issues with the Elsa generative AI tool unveiled by the federal agency last month. Three employees said that in practice, Elsa has hallucinated nonexistent studies or misrepresented real research. "Anything that you don't have time to double-check is unreliable," one source told the publication. "It hallucinates confidently." Which isn't exactly ideal for a tool that's supposed to be speeding up the clinical review process and aiding with making efficient, informed decisions to benefit patients.

Leadership at the FDA appeared unfazed by the potential problems posed by Elsa. "I have not heard those specific concerns," FDA Commissioner Marty Makary told CNN. He also emphasized that using Elsa and participating in the training to use it are currently voluntary at the agency.

A spokesperson for the Department of Health and Human Services told Engadget that "the information provided by FDA to CNN was mischaracterized and taken out of context." The spokesperson also claimed that CNN led its story with "disgruntled former employees and sources who have never even used the current version of Elsa." The agency claims to have guardrails and guidance for how its employees can use the tool, but its statement doesn’t address that Elsa, like any AI platform, can and will deliver incorrect or incomplete information at times. We have not yet received a response to our request for additional details.

The CNN investigation highlighting these flaws with the FDA's artificial intelligence arrived on the same day as the White House introduced an "AI Action Plan." The program presented AI development as a technological arms race that the US should win at all costs, and it laid out plans to remove "red tape and onerous regulation" in the sector. It also demanded that AI be free of "ideological bias," or in other words, only following the biases of the current administration by removing mentions of climate change, misinformation, and diversity, equity and inclusion efforts. Considering each of those three topics has a documented impact on public health, the ability of tools like Elsa to provide genuine benefits to both the FDA and to US patients looks increasingly doubtful.

Update, July 24, 2025, 6:35PM ET: Added a statement from the Department of Health and Human Services.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/ai/fda-employees-say-the-agencys-elsa-generative-ai-hallucinates-entire-studies-203547157.html?src=rss

©

© Reuters / Reuters

At the start of the year, President Trump announced his AI Action Plan, an initiative he said would eventually enact policy that would "enhance America's position as an AI powerhouse." Now, after months of consultation with industry players like Google and OpenAI, the administration has finally shared the specific actions it plans to take.   

Notably, the framework seeks to limit state regulation of AI companies by instructing the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) and other federal agencies to consider a state's existing AI laws before awarding AI-related funding. "The Federal government should not allow AI-related Federal funding to be directed to those states with burdensome AI regulations that waste these funds," the document states. As you may recall, Trump's "Big Beautiful Bill" was supposed to include a 10-year qualified moratorium on state AI regulation before that amendment was ultimately removed in a 99-1 vote by the US Senate.

Elsewhere, the AI Action Plan targets AI systems the White House says promote "social engineering agendas." To that end, Trump plans to direct the National Institute of Standards and Technology, through the Department of Commerce, to revise its AI Risk Management Framework to remove any mentions of "misinformation, Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion, and climate change." Furthermore, he's calling for an update to the federal government's procurement guidelines to ensure the government only contracts model providers that can definitively say their AI systems are "free from top-down ideological bias." Just how companies like OpenAI, Google and others are expected to do this is unclear from the document. 

Separately, Trump says he plans to remove regulatory hurdles that slow the construction of AI data centers. "America's environmental permitting system and other regulations make it almost impossible to build this infrastructure in the United States with the speed that is required," the document states. Specifically, the president plans to make federal lands available for the construction of data centers and power generation facilities. Under the Action Plan, the federal government will also expand efforts to use AI to carry out environmental reviews.    

The president plans to sign a handful of executive orders today to start the wheels turning on his action plan. Trump began his second term by rescinding President Biden's October 2023 AI guidelines. Biden's executive order outlined a plan to establish protections for the general public with regard to artificial intelligence. Specifically, the EO sought new standards for safety and security in addition to protocols for AI watermarking and both civil rights and consumer protections.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/ai/trumps-ai-action-plan-targets-state-regulation-and-ideological-bias-163247225.html?src=rss

©

© Reuters / Reuters

The US government agency in charge of designing and maintaining nuclear weapons was among those breached by a hack of Microsoft's SharePoint server software, Bloomberg reported. However, attackers weren't able to obtain any sensitive or classified information, according to an unnamed source with knowledge of the matter. 

The breach occurred at the National Nuclear Security Administration, an arm of the Energy Department responsible for producing and dismantling nuclear arms. "On Friday, July 18th, the exploitation of a Microsoft SharePoint zero-day vulnerability began affecting the Department of Energy," a spokesperson told Bloomberg. "A very small number of systems were impacted. All impacted systems are being restored."

The exploit only affects SharePoint for on-premises servers. The Department of energy said it was minimally impacted because it widely uses Microsoft M365 cloud "and very capable cybersecurity systems," the spokesperson added.

Microsoft blamed the attack on state-sponsored Chinese hackers. They reportedly exploited flaws in SharePoint document management software and were able to access and control systems and steal security credentials and tokens. "It's a dream for ransomware operators," Google's Threat Intelligence Group said, adding that the flaw allows "persistent, unauthenticated access that can bypass future patching." 

Attackers also accessed the US Education Department and Florida's Department of Revenue, along with government systems in other nations including the Middle East and Europe. Microsoft announced on Monday that it had released a new security patch "to mitigate active attacks targeting on-premises [and not online] servers." 

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/cybersecurity/us-nuclear-weapons-agency-breached-using-microsoft-sharepoint-hack-120027770.html?src=rss

©

© REUTERS / Reuters

The British government has announced plans to move forward with a law that would bar public organizations from paying off ransomware attackers. The proposed legislation would add schools, town councils, National Health Service (NHS) hospitals and critical infrastructure managers to a ban which already applies to the national government.

The logic behind banning payments is simple. If cybercriminals know a ransomware attack against a UK school or hospital won't get them paid, they'll look somewhere else for a more lucrative target. Security Minister Dan Jarvis said that the government is "determined to smash the cyber criminal business model," and added that laws in the proposed package will require even private businesses to seek guidance from the government before paying a ransom.

Since the WannaCry attack on the NHS in 2017 launched the modern era of ransomware attacks, the UK has suffered a number of serious incidents. In the last two years alone, attacks have hit the British Library, the BBC and the Ministry of Defence. This may explain why, according to the government's announcement, "nearly three quarters" of public comments on the ban legislation were supportive.

Although bans on ransom payments are a popular solution to the ever-increasing scourge of ransomware, there's currently not much data on whether they work. Two US states, North Carolina and Florida, have enacted similar bans, but it's hard to say what impact they've had. Critics argue that some organizations, especially hospitals, can't afford the long-term disruption of leaving the ransom unpaid, and may choose to pay in unaccountable ways. Furthermore, some hacking groups have aims other than money, and may continue ransomware attacks to sow political chaos.

The UK is moving into uncharted territory as the first nation to pass a ransomware payment ban. We'll be interested to see whether it helps get attacks under control. Either way, the outcome is likely to inform how other countries respond to the continuing threat of cybercrime.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/cybersecurity/new-uk-law-would-ban-ransomware-payments-by-publicly-funded-orgs-210851334.html?src=rss

©

© Smederevac via Getty Images

Meta said on Friday that it won't sign the European Union's new AI code of practice. The guidelines provide a framework for the EU's AI Act, which regulates companies operating in the European Union.

The EU's code of practice is voluntary, so Meta was under no legal obligation to sign it. Yet Meta's Chief Global Affairs Officer, Joel Kaplan, made a point to publicly knock the guidelines on Friday. He described the code as "over-reach."

"Europe is heading down the wrong path on AI," Kaplan posted in a statement. "We have carefully reviewed the European Commission’s Code of Practice for general-purpose AI (GPAI) models and Meta won’t be signing it. This Code introduces a number of legal uncertainties for model developers, as well as measures which go far beyond the scope of the AI Act."

So, why kick up a (public) fuss about not signing something Meta was under no obligation to sign? Well, this isn't the first time the company has waged a PR battle against Europe's AI regulations. It previously called the AI Act "unpredictable," claiming "it goes too far" and is "hampering innovation and holding back developers." In February, Meta's public policy director said, "The net result of all of that is that products get delayed or get watered down and European citizens and consumers suffer."

Outmuscling the EU may seem like a more attainable goal to Meta, given that it has an anti-regulation ally in the White House. In April, President Trump pressured the EU to abandon the AI Act. He described the rules as "a form of taxation."

Pool via Getty Images

The EU published its code of practice on July 10. It includes tangible guidelines to help companies follow the AI Act. Among other things, the code bans companies from training AI on pirated materials and requires them to respect requests from writers and artists to omit their work from training data. It also requires developers to provide regularly updated documentation describing their AI features.

Although signing the code of practice is voluntary, doing so has its perks. Agreeing to it can give companies more legal protection against future accusations of breaching the AI Act. Thomas Regnier, the European Commission's spokesperson for digital matters, added more color in a statement to Bloomberg. He said that AI providers who don't sign it "will have to demonstrate other means of compliance." As a consequence, they "may be exposed to more regulatory scrutiny."

Companies that violate the AI Act can face hefty penalties. The European Commission can impose fines of up to seven percent of a company's annual sales. The penalties are a lower three percent for those developing advanced AI models.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/ai/meta-says-it-wont-sign-the-eus-ai-code-of-practice-190132690.html?src=rss

©

© Meta

Chinese President Xi Jinping has bluntly questioned a nationwide rush of investment into the AI and EV industries. As deflation anxiety grows and Trump’s trade war with China ramps up, the world’s second largest economy is turning to fast-growth tech industries to remain competitive.

But Xi appears to think that the strategy is flawed. As reported by the Financial Times, China's President sent out a pointed message about over-investment at the two-day Central Urban Work Conference in Beijing.

"When it comes to projects, there are a few things — artificial intelligence, computing power and new energy vehicles," he said in a speech that made the front page of the People’s Daily, the official newspaper of the Communist Party. "Do all provinces in the country have to develop industries in these directions?"

The Financial Times reports that Xi went on to criticise officials who encourage hasty development but don’t hang around to face the consequences. “We should not only focus on how much GDP has grown and how many major projects have been built, but also on how much debt is owed,” Xi told conference attendees. "We should not let some people pass the buck and leave problems to future generations."

For now though, there’s no suggestion that China is shifting its focus away from the sectors Xi directly referenced. This week, NVIDIA was granted permission by the US government to resume selling its AI chips to China, with the company reportedly holding $8 billion in unshipped orders. It was initially blocked from selling the H20 AI GPU to China over concerns it could aid the nation’s military.

China is the global leader of the EV industry, and the country is taking on the US in the robotaxi race too. It was announced this week that Uber is partnering with Baidu to bring thousands of the Chinese company’s Apollo Go autonomous vehicles onto the Uber network in mainland China and other non-US markets.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/big-tech/xi-jinping-warns-against-chinas-overinvestment-in-evs-and-ai-154054773.html?src=rss

©

© ASSOCIATED PRESS

A Russian lawmaker who regulates the IT industry said WhatsApp should prepare to stop offering its services in the country. Anton Gorelkin, the deputy head of the lower house of parliament's IT committee, said that it's very likely that WhatsApp will be placed on a list of restricted software, as Reuters reports.

WhatsApp owner Meta is designated as an extremist organisation in Russia, which has banned Facebook and Instagram since 2022. This week, President Vladimir Putin issued a directive for the nation to further restrict software (including communication apps) stemming from "unfriendly countries" that have sanctioned Russia, with a deadline of September 1. Gorelkin said WhatsApp will probably be one such service.

In June, Putin signed a law to create a state-affiliated messaging app that will tie into government services as part of a long-standing effort to rely more on Russian services and less on foreign tech companies — some of which withdrew from the country or scaled down operations there after Russia invaded Ukraine in 2022. Gorelkin suggested that forcing WhatsApp to stop operating in Russia could help the state-backed app gain more market share.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/big-tech/whatsapp-should-prepare-to-stop-operating-in-russia-official-says-140044721.html?src=rss

©

© SOPA Images via Getty Images

Rebecca Kelly Slaughter, one of the Democratic FTC Commissioners President Trump had fired back in March, said she looks forward to getting back to work. US District Judge Loren AliKhan has just ruled that her removal from the agency was "unlawful and without legal effect" and that she was still a "rightful member" of the commission. The judge explained that the firings violated protections that prevent a president from unilaterally removing officials at independent agencies. 

In her statement after the ruling was handed down, Slaughter said the "for-cause removal protections that apply to [her] colleagues and her at the FTC also protect other independent economic regulators like the SEC, the FDIC, and the Federal Reserve." Slaughter was one of the two Democratic members of the Federal Trade Commission that Trump had removed from their position, leaving only three Republican commissioners in charge. 

Historically, the FTC had five members: Three from the same party as the president and two from the opposite party. At the moment, FTC's website only lists the three current Republican commissioners, including Chairman Andrew Ferguson. The chairman previously said that he had "no doubts about [Trump's] constitutional authority to remove Commissioners, which is necessary to ensure democratic accountability for [the] government." The other fired Democratic commissioner, Alvaro Bedoya, was originally part of the lawsuit. However, his claims had been dismissed since he resigned from the agency completely and took on a private-sector job since then, explaining that he couldn't afford to have no income while the case was in court. 

White House spokesperson Kush Desai told The New York Times that the administration would appeal AliKhan's decision. "The Supreme Court has repeatedly upheld the president’s constitutional authority to fire and remove executive officers who exercise his authority,” he added. The judge expected as such and noted in her ruling that the case would likely reach the Supreme Court. As Politico has noted, the Supreme Court previously refused to reinstate the members of the National Labor Relations Board and the Merit Systems Protection Board that Trump had fired. Those personnel were also supposed to be protected by the federal law the restricts the president's ability to remove government agency officials. 

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/big-tech/trumps-firing-of-democratic-ftc-commissioner-was-unlawful-judge-rules-120029367.html?src=rss

©

© mphillips007 via Getty Images

"This is probably the most uncertain future NASA has faced, maybe since the end of Apollo," Casey Dreier tells me over the phone. Dreier is the chief of space policy at The Planetary Society, a nonprofit that advocates for the exploration and study of space.

On July 10, the Senate Appropriations Committee met to discuss the proposed federal Commerce, Justice and Science budget for 2026. While on average, funding for NASA has accounted for about 0.3 percent of total yearly spending by the federal government since the start of the 2010s, President Trump has called for a 24 percent cut year over year to the agency's operating allowance. By any metric, his plan would be devastating.

Adjusted for inflation, it would leave NASA with the smallest operating budget it has had since Russian cosmonaut Yuri Gagarin became the first human to travel to space in 1961. In the process, it would eviscerate the agency's science budget by nearly half, resulting in the termination of 55 ongoing and or planned missions. It would also leave NASA with its smallest workforce in 70 years. All this, at a time when the agency has been tasked with returning to the Moon and bringing the first humans to Mars.

"There's no historical precedent to this level of single year, functionally indiscriminate and dramatic cuts. You lose, in one year, a third of all active science projects. [The Trump administration is] proposing to turn off missions that are performing not just good science, but unique and irreplaceable science. This isn't so they can reinvest the money in some radical new science efforts. No, the money is gone," said Dreier. "It's almost certainly the greatest threat to NASA science activities in the history of the space agency."

Dreier isn't exaggerating when he says some missions would be impossible to replace. One of the casualties of Trump's cuts would be the New Horizons probe. In 2015, New Horizons gave us our best look at Pluto ever. Four years later, it performed the farthest flyby in human history. As things stand, it's the only active spacecraft in the Kuiper belt, a region of our solar system that is not well-understood by scientists. Even if NASA were to start working on a replacement today, it would take a generation for that vehicle to reach where New Horizons is right now. It costs NASA about $14.7 million per year to continue operating the probe, a fraction of the $29.9 billion in additional funding Congress allocated to fund ICE enforcement and detainment operations in the president's recently passed tax bill.

Heather Roper

Another mission that would be impossible to replace is OSIRIS-APEX. If the name sounds familiar, it's because OSRIS-APEX is a continuation of NASA's incredibly successful OSRIS-REx flight. In 2020, the spacecraft visited 101955 Bennu, an ancient asteroid about the size of the Empire State Building, and collected a sample of regolith (rocks and dirt) from its surface using a never-before-tried technique.

After OSRIS-REx successfully returned the sample to Earth, NASA decided to extend the spacecraft's mission and fly to another asteroid, 99942 Apophis. In 2029, Apophis will pass about 19,600 miles from Earth. It will be the closest approach of any known asteroid of its size. NASA said the extension would add $200 million to a mission that had already cost it an estimated $1.16 billion.

"This project is a pennies on the dollar repurposing of an existing spacecraft. It's the only American spacecraft that will be at Apophis for a once in a generation opportunity to study an asteroid that will just barely miss us," said Dreier. "That seems important to know."

At a time when nearly every facet of American life is being upturned, the potential cancellation of dozens of NASA missions might seem a distant concern, but the gutting of the agency's science budget would have a ripple effect on communities across the US.

"NASA is an engine for jobs in the country, and for every NASA job, there are many more that are created in the private workforce," said Bethany Ehlmann, Professor of Planetary Science at the California Institute of Technology. She also serves on the board of directors for The Planetary Society.

Professor Ehlmann's claim is supported by NASA's own data. In 2023, the agency employed 17,823 full-time civil servants nationwide. With NASA's private sector support factored in, that year the agency's missions were responsible for sustaining 304,803 jobs across all 50 states and the District of Columbia. Put another way, for every full-time equivalent job at a NASA facility, NASA supports at least 16 private sector jobs. "Space science has been broadly supported and impacts roughly three quarters of every congressional district in the country," said Dreier. "It's not just a red or blue state thing."

Following last week's Senate meeting, policymakers from both parties said they would push back on President Trump's NASA budget cuts. On Tuesday, the House Appropriations Committee's Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science and Related Agencies passed a funding bill that would provide NASA with a total budget of $24.8 billion for 2026, or the same amount it was allocated this year. The week before, the corresponding subcommittee in the Senate passed its own NASA funding bill.

The two versions differ on one critical detail. The Senate legislation maintains the agency's science budget at $7.3 billion, while the House version seeks to reduce it by 18 percent to $6 billion. Separately, the House is calling for a 23 percent cut to the National Science Foundation's budget. NSF funds much of the nation's astronomy research.

"What I'm hearing from lawmakers is that they understand how important NASA is to industry. They understand how important NASA is to universities in terms of training, and providing grants that train the next generation of the space workforce," said Professor Ehlmann, who was on Capitol Hill last week. The House and Senate will need to come to an agreement for the bill to move forward.

Even with many lawmakers in favor of maintaining NASA's budget, a flat budget is still a funding cut when accounting for inflation. Moreover, NASA has already been negatively affected by the Trump administration's efforts to trim the federal workforce.

According to reporting Politico published on July 9, 2,694 NASA employees have agreed to leave the agency through either early retirement, a buyout or a deferred resignation. Of those individuals, 2,145 are workers in senior positions and 1,818 are staff serving in missions areas like human spaceflight and science. "Once the workforce is gone, they're gone. You lose a ton of institutional knowledge," said Dreier. The employees who have agreed to leave represent about 15 percent of NASA's 2023 workforce of 17,823. With the July 25 deadline for early retirement, voluntary separation and deferred resignations quickly approaching, that number is likely to grow. NASA's shifting priorities under the Trump administration have also created uncertainty among the agency's contractors.

According to former NASA employee and NASA Watch creator Keith Cowing the workforce cuts are already affecting employees. "In the 40 years I've been involved with NASA in one way or another, I've never seen morale so bad," he said. "Is NASA bloated? Yeah, but the way you deal with bloat is to go in with a scalpel and you cut carefully. And yet you have people [like Elon Musk] standing on stage with chainsaws. That is not the way to run government, and it's certainly not the way to create the machinery needed to explore the universe."

Whatever happens next, Dreier worries there's the potential for there to be an erosion in public support for NASA. He points to a survey published by Pew Research. In 2023, the organization found that monitoring for asteroids that could hit Earth and tracking changes to the planet's climate were the two activities Americans wanted NASA to prioritize over other mandates. By contrast, sending human astronauts to the Moon and Mars were the least important priorities for the public.

REUTERS / Reuters

The House version of NASA's 2026 budget would boost the agency's exploration budget by 25 percent to $9.7 billion. In Trump's tax bill, Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) included language that provided NASA with $4.1 billion for the fourth and fifth flights of the Space Launch System (SLS) rocket — the vehicle intended to carry the first NASA astronauts back to the Moon before before private sector alternatives like SpaceX's Starship are ready to fly.

With both the Trump administration and House pushing Moon and Mars missions as priorities, Dreier says they're "ironically doubling down on the activities that the private sector is already doing — SpaceX says it's going to send humans to Mars — and abandoning the things that only NASA does. There's no private sector company doing space science."

In effect, a NASA budget that sacrifices on scientific research in lieu of Mars missions would be one that invests in things the public says are the least important to it.

"I worry that they're moving away from what the public expects their space agency to do, and that as a consequence, it will undermine public investment in NASA," he said. "NASA is usually tied for the number one or two most popular federal agency. People wear NASA t-shirts. No one wears a Department of the Interior t-shirt walking out of the GAP. It's a rare and precious thing to have, and they're risking it. It's not just the future of the agency that's at risk, but the future of the public's relationship with it."

When asked for comment on this story, Bethany Stevens, NASA's press secretary, pointed Engadget to a letter from Acting Administrator Janet Petro NASA shared in a technical supplement it published alongside the president's budget request.

"We must continue to be responsible stewards of taxpayer dollars. That means making strategic decisions — including scaling back or discontinuing ineffective efforts not aligned with our Moon and Mars exploration priorities" Petro wrote.

The final NASA budget for 2026 is still months away from being finalized. After Tuesday's vote, the two funding bills will move to the full Senate and House appropriations committees for a vote and further revisions. Only after that will every member of each chamber get a chance to vote on the matter. Congress has until September 30 to complete the appropriations process before 2025 funding runs out. President Trump could also decide to veto the bill if it doesn't align with his priorities.

Have a tip for Igor? You can reach him by email, on Bluesky or send a message to @Kodachrome.72 to chat confidentially on Signal.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/science/space/trumps-defunding-of-nasa-would-be-catastrophic-153053020.html?src=rss

©

© REUTERS / Reuters